On the US elections - I think Pelosi tearing the speech up (I have no idea of the content) will play badly for the Dems in the general. I'm coming to the conclusion that Trump is the likely winner. To put him as a lock though is ridiculous.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
Nope.. HS2 is going north of crew... you heard it here first.
Phase 2 will have branches to York, Leeds, Manchester and Wigan.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
On the US elections - I think Pelosi tearing the speech up (I have no idea of the content) will play badly for the Dems in the general. I'm coming to the conclusion that Trump is the likely winner. To put him as a lock though is ridiculous.
Agreed. Americans are a patriotic lot and that is unprecedented as far as I can think of and childish to boot.
Imagine Corbyn tearing up the Queen's Speech while she's talking. Its absurd.
On the US elections - I think Pelosi tearing the speech up (I have no idea of the content) will play badly for the Dems in the general. I'm coming to the conclusion that Trump is the likely winner. To put him as a lock though is ridiculous.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
To be fair HS2 is domestic and Euston is a major domestic station, whereas St Pancras and HS1 is meant for international journeys. Why should they be the same?
There's a six minute walk between Euston and St Pancras. Many airports will have a more than six minute walk between terminals so its not exactly world's apart.
Trying to pare back spending plans intended to deliver tangible benefits to the electorate before 2024 in order to set aside funds for a railway eventually costing £100bn+ in initial capital alone that will only become part operational more than a decade hence.
Yes, I can see why Cummings is tearing his hair out, or would be if he had any.
I think that's a misdescription. HS2 and other infrastructure is going to get stuck on the credit card. What is more difficult is current spending. If you want record increases in NHS spending and 20k more cops other current spending has to be squeezed to meet those priorities. That is where the battle is.
Another debt for our children and grandchildren to bear?
Yep but hopefully they will have a vastly overpriced train set to play with.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
Even worse, it's only about 400 yards from the station that does!
"poach"? What they did was use a very strong savings rate and very conservative fiscal policies to (a) boost investments and (b) suppress domestic demand, taking advantage of the more fiscally expansive policies in both the EZ and the UK to grow whilst somewhat hypocritically criticising the former for such policies.
I think it was and is pretty selfish myself. Germany has the capacity to significantly increase domestic demand boosting not only their own growth but EZ growth generally. But they don't.
Do they?
To be fair to German budgetary hawks, German debt to GDP is still above 60% and higher than it was at the start of the century when the Euro launched. If they want to get down to say 30-40% of GDP like we had before Brown tanked our economy they've still got a long road ahead of them.
"before Brown tanked our economy"
Brown's government net borrowing plans in the immediate period before the 2008 crash were indeed reasonable, which is why Cameron and Osborne felt able to mirror them in opposition. So I assume that by "tanked the economy" you are referring to the coordinated worldwide emergency actions in the period 2008 to 2010 made in order to keep the banking system afloat. What would you have done differently?
I see Japanese officials are now worrying about the Olympics in the summer after 20 passengers on a cruise ship have been diagnosed with Coronavirus.
It is starting to feel like the efforts to contain it will fail, which could have huge ramifications for global healthcare systems and the global economy.
The next week or two are absolutely crucial to how this plays out. It could very much still go both ways, and could lead to any mass gatherings being banned for months in a lot of Asian countries.
"poach"? What they did was use a very strong savings rate and very conservative fiscal policies to (a) boost investments and (b) suppress domestic demand, taking advantage of the more fiscally expansive policies in both the EZ and the UK to grow whilst somewhat hypocritically criticising the former for such policies.
I think it was and is pretty selfish myself. Germany has the capacity to significantly increase domestic demand boosting not only their own growth but EZ growth generally. But they don't.
Do they?
To be fair to German budgetary hawks, German debt to GDP is still above 60% and higher than it was at the start of the century when the Euro launched. If they want to get down to say 30-40% of GDP like we had before Brown tanked our economy they've still got a long road ahead of them.
"before Brown tanked our economy"
Brown's government net borrowing plans in the immediate period before the 2008 crash were indeed reasonable, which is why Cameron and Osborne felt able to mirror them in opposition. So I assume that by "tanked the economy" you are referring to the coordinated worldwide emergency actions in the period 2008 to 2010 made in order to keep the banking system afloat. What would you have done differently?
They weren't reasonable because our deficit was maxed out before the recession.
I would have by 2008 been running a small budgetary surplus rather than a maxed out credit card deficit before the recession hit. Just like happened with the prior recession. Brown had a small budget surplus at the start of the century but in the years prior to the recession ran a hefty deficit every year on the misguided belief he'd "eliminated boom and bust". He hadn't and his hubris cost us dearly.
If only I could put “arguing with strangers about politics on the internet” as a ‘hobby’ as part of these training contract applications...
"Enjoy discussing both global and uk politics with a wide variety of people"
I think I would be very predisposed against a candidate who put that on an application, as it screams "trouble". Three things everyone knows you shouldn't discuss at work; anyone who's sufficiently unaware of that to draw attention to it...
Trying to pare back spending plans intended to deliver tangible benefits to the electorate before 2024 in order to set aside funds for a railway eventually costing £100bn+ in initial capital alone that will only become part operational more than a decade hence.
Yes, I can see why Cummings is tearing his hair out, or would be if he had any.
I think that's a misdescription. HS2 and other infrastructure is going to get stuck on the credit card. What is more difficult is current spending. If you want record increases in NHS spending and 20k more cops other current spending has to be squeezed to meet those priorities. That is where the battle is.
Another debt for our children and grandchildren to bear?
Yep but hopefully they will have a vastly overpriced train set to play with.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
Even worse, it's only about 400 yards from the station that does!
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
Even worse, it's only about 400 yards from the station that does!
Bonkers.
I suppose its bonkers for you that airports have multiple terminals? Why fly into Terminal 2 when you could just be going to Terminal 1?
"poach"? What they did was use a very strong savings rate and very conservative fiscal policies to (a) boost investments and (b) suppress domestic demand, taking advantage of the more fiscally expansive policies in both the EZ and the UK to grow whilst somewhat hypocritically criticising the former for such policies.
I think it was and is pretty selfish myself. Germany has the capacity to significantly increase domestic demand boosting not only their own growth but EZ growth generally. But they don't.
Do they?
To be fair to German budgetary hawks, German debt to GDP is still above 60% and higher than it was at the start of the century when the Euro launched. If they want to get down to say 30-40% of GDP like we had before Brown tanked our economy they've still got a long road ahead of them.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
Even worse, it's only about 400 yards from the station that does!
On the US elections - I think Pelosi tearing the speech up (I have no idea of the content) will play badly for the Dems in the general. I'm coming to the conclusion that Trump is the likely winner. To put him as a lock though is ridiculous.
Tearing up the speech was spiteful. She could have made a more powerful statement by remaining completely impassive throughout. But she didn't. She acted like a petulant teenager.
Trump was typically Trump by not shaking her hand. But she descended to his level by her actions.
You can't claim the moral high ground when you do things like that.
If only I could put “arguing with strangers about politics on the internet” as a ‘hobby’ as part of these training contract applications...
"Enjoy discussing both global and uk politics with a wide variety of people"
I think I would be very predisposed against a candidate who put that on an application, as it screams "trouble". Three things everyone knows you shouldn't discuss at work; anyone who's sufficiently unaware of that to draw attention to it...
"poach"? What they did was use a very strong savings rate and very conservative fiscal policies to (a) boost investments and (b) suppress domestic demand, taking advantage of the more fiscally expansive policies in both the EZ and the UK to grow whilst somewhat hypocritically criticising the former for such policies.
I think it was and is pretty selfish myself. Germany has the capacity to significantly increase domestic demand boosting not only their own growth but EZ growth generally. But they don't.
Do they?
To be fair to German budgetary hawks, German debt to GDP is still above 60% and higher than it was at the start of the century when the Euro launched. If they want to get down to say 30-40% of GDP like we had before Brown tanked our economy they've still got a long road ahead of them.
"before Brown tanked our economy"
Brown's government net borrowing plans in the immediate period before the 2008 crash were indeed reasonable, which is why Cameron and Osborne felt able to mirror them in opposition. So I assume that by "tanked the economy" you are referring to the coordinated worldwide emergency actions in the period 2008 to 2010 made in order to keep the banking system afloat. What would you have done differently?
They weren't reasonable because our deficit was maxed out before the recession.
I would have by 2008 been running a small budgetary surplus rather than a maxed out credit card deficit before the recession hit. Just like happened with the prior recession. Brown had a small budget surplus at the start of the century but in the years prior to the recession ran a hefty deficit every year on the misguided belief he'd "eliminated boom and bust". He hadn't and his hubris cost us dearly.
Our deficit was not "maxed out". By historical comparisons, it was modest. By international comparisons, it was modest.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
To be fair HS2 is domestic and Euston is a major domestic station, whereas St Pancras and HS1 is meant for international journeys. Why should they be the same?
There's a six minute walk between Euston and St Pancras. Many airports will have a more than six minute walk between terminals so its not exactly world's apart.
I think the point is that it precludes direct North-Paris trains along the fastest routes. The time to change trains is never just a 6 minute walk (or monorail or whatever).
For instance, there used to be about a 15 minute gap between East Coast Leeds-King's Cross trains arriving and St Pancras Javelins departing. The times I've attempted that, with family in tow to be fair, that has never proved quite makeable despite the walk between stations being 2 minutes and so our King's Cross arrival to St Pancras departure has ended up being 45 minutes.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
To be fair HS2 is domestic and Euston is a major domestic station, whereas St Pancras and HS1 is meant for international journeys. Why should they be the same?
There's a six minute walk between Euston and St Pancras. Many airports will have a more than six minute walk between terminals so its not exactly world's apart.
Actually, HS1 also has domestic high speed trains to Ashford, Canterbury, Dover and Ramsgate.
"poach"? What they did was use a very strong savings rate and very conservative fiscal policies to (a) boost investments and (b) suppress domestic demand, taking advantage of the more fiscally expansive policies in both the EZ and the UK to grow whilst somewhat hypocritically criticising the former for such policies.
I think it was and is pretty selfish myself. Germany has the capacity to significantly increase domestic demand boosting not only their own growth but EZ growth generally. But they don't.
Do they?
To be fair to German budgetary hawks, German debt to GDP is still above 60% and higher than it was at the start of the century when the Euro launched. If they want to get down to say 30-40% of GDP like we had before Brown tanked our economy they've still got a long road ahead of them.
So it should! They're growing not in recession so it should be falling and its higher than it should be and used to be. That doesn't mean they have the capacity to significantly increase domestic demand.
Just because you aren't maxing out the credit card today doesn't mean you should, that's what Brown got wrong.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
Even worse, it's only about 400 yards from the station that does!
Bonkers.
Perhaps an underground moving walkway?
You'd like to think so! Also a connector somewhere on the line to allow trains to move between the branches.
"poach"? What they did was use a very strong savings rate and very conservative fiscal policies to (a) boost investments and (b) suppress domestic demand, taking advantage of the more fiscally expansive policies in both the EZ and the UK to grow whilst somewhat hypocritically criticising the former for such policies.
I think it was and is pretty selfish myself. Germany has the capacity to significantly increase domestic demand boosting not only their own growth but EZ growth generally. But they don't.
Do they?
To be fair to German budgetary hawks, German debt to GDP is still above 60% and higher than it was at the start of the century when the Euro launched. If they want to get down to say 30-40% of GDP like we had before Brown tanked our economy they've still got a long road ahead of them.
"before Brown tanked our economy"
Brown's government net borrowing plans in the immediate period before the 2008 crash were indeed reasonable, which is why Cameron and Osborne felt able to mirror them in opposition. So I assume that by "tanked the economy" you are referring to the coordinated worldwide emergency actions in the period 2008 to 2010 made in order to keep the banking system afloat. What would you have done differently?
They weren't reasonable because our deficit was maxed out before the recession.
I would have by 2008 been running a small budgetary surplus rather than a maxed out credit card deficit before the recession hit. Just like happened with the prior recession. Brown had a small budget surplus at the start of the century but in the years prior to the recession ran a hefty deficit every year on the misguided belief he'd "eliminated boom and bust". He hadn't and his hubris cost us dearly.
I'm not going to put aside the time to argue the toss with you on that, although I dispute that. My point was different, namely that your criticism of Brown would if valid be equally applicable to the Conservatives in opposition because they went along with those pre 2008 net borrowing plans, only disputing points within them rather than the overall net borrowing envelope. Osborne's main thrust in the Autumn of 2007 was that there should be inheritance tax cuts matched by slightly less overall spending, leaving borrowing levels unchanged. Osborne wasn't arguing then that the government should have been running a budgetary surplus.
Mr. JohnL, borrowing needlessly during a boom was unwise, however.
As was the assumption in the MTFS that the extraordinary income rolling in from the City in general and the banks in particular was the new normal on which future spending could be based.
"poach"? What they did was use a very strong savings rate and very conservative fiscal policies to (a) boost investments and (b) suppress domestic demand, taking advantage of the more fiscally expansive policies in both the EZ and the UK to grow whilst somewhat hypocritically criticising the former for such policies.
I think it was and is pretty selfish myself. Germany has the capacity to significantly increase domestic demand boosting not only their own growth but EZ growth generally. But they don't.
Do they?
To be fair to German budgetary hawks, German debt to GDP is still above 60% and higher than it was at the start of the century when the Euro launched. If they want to get down to say 30-40% of GDP like we had before Brown tanked our economy they've still got a long road ahead of them.
"before Brown tanked our economy"
Brown's government net borrowing plans in the immediate period before the 2008 crash were indeed reasonable, which is why Cameron and Osborne felt able to mirror them in opposition. So I assume that by "tanked the economy" you are referring to the coordinated worldwide emergency actions in the period 2008 to 2010 made in order to keep the banking system afloat. What would you have done differently?
They weren't reasonable because our deficit was maxed out before the recession.
I would have by 2008 been running a small budgetary surplus rather than a maxed out credit card deficit before the recession hit. Just like happened with the prior recession. Brown had a small budget surplus at the start of the century but in the years prior to the recession ran a hefty deficit every year on the misguided belief he'd "eliminated boom and bust". He hadn't and his hubris cost us dearly.
Our deficit was not "maxed out". By historical comparisons, it was modest. By international comparisons, it was modest.
"poach"? What they did was use a very strong savings rate and very conservative fiscal policies to (a) boost investments and (b) suppress domestic demand, taking advantage of the more fiscally expansive policies in both the EZ and the UK to grow whilst somewhat hypocritically criticising the former for such policies.
I think it was and is pretty selfish myself. Germany has the capacity to significantly increase domestic demand boosting not only their own growth but EZ growth generally. But they don't.
Do they?
To be fair to German budgetary hawks, German debt to GDP is still above 60% and higher than it was at the start of the century when the Euro launched. If they want to get down to say 30-40% of GDP like we had before Brown tanked our economy they've still got a long road ahead of them.
"before Brown tanked our economy"
Brown's government net borrowing plans in the immediate period before the 2008 crash were indeed reasonable, which is why Cameron and Osborne felt able to mirror them in opposition. So I assume that by "tanked the economy" you are referring to the coordinated worldwide emergency actions in the period 2008 to 2010 made in order to keep the banking system afloat. What would you have done differently?
They weren't reasonable because our deficit was maxed out before the recession.
I would have by 2008 been running a small budgetary surplus rather than a maxed out credit card deficit before the recession hit. Just like happened with the prior recession. Brown had a small budget surplus at the start of the century but in the years prior to the recession ran a hefty deficit every year on the misguided belief he'd "eliminated boom and bust". He hadn't and his hubris cost us dearly.
I'm not going to put aside the time to argue the toss with you on that, although I dispute that. My point was different, namely that your criticism of Brown would if valid be equally applicable to the Conservatives in opposition because they went along with those pre 2008 net borrowing plans, only disputing points within them rather than the overall net borrowing envelope. Osborne's main thrust in the Autumn of 2007 was that there should be inheritance tax cuts matched by slightly less overall spending, leaving borrowing levels unchanged. Osborne wasn't arguing then that the government should have been running a budgetary surplus.
Judge governments by what they do rather than what they say in opposition. In government Osborne reduced the deficit every year - I respect that.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
If only we'd done like France and put all the TGV lines into one Paris station......oh.....
"poach"? What they did was use a very strong savings rate and very conservative fiscal policies to (a) boost investments and (b) suppress domestic demand, taking advantage of the more fiscally expansive policies in both the EZ and the UK to grow whilst somewhat hypocritically criticising the former for such policies.
I think it was and is pretty selfish myself. Germany has the capacity to significantly increase domestic demand boosting not only their own growth but EZ growth generally. But they don't.
Do they?
To be fair to German budgetary hawks, German debt to GDP is still above 60% and higher than it was at the start of the century when the Euro launched. If they want to get down to say 30-40% of GDP like we had before Brown tanked our economy they've still got a long road ahead of them.
"before Brown tanked our economy"
Brown's government net borrowing plans in the immediate period before the 2008 crash were indeed reasonable, which is why Cameron and Osborne felt able to mirror them in opposition. So I assume that by "tanked the economy" you are referring to the coordinated worldwide emergency actions in the period 2008 to 2010 made in order to keep the banking system afloat. What would you have done differently?
They weren't reasonable because our deficit was maxed out before the recession.
I would have by 2008 been running a small budgetary surplus rather than a maxed out credit card deficit before the recession hit. Just like happened with the prior recession. Brown had a small budget surplus at the start of the century but in the years prior to the recession ran a hefty deficit every year on the misguided belief he'd "eliminated boom and bust". He hadn't and his hubris cost us dearly.
Our deficit was not "maxed out". By historical comparisons, it was modest. By international comparisons, it was modest.
Not true. It was above 2% every year.
And if you look at this bar chart from 2010, you can see this was not remarkable when compared with the Major or Thatcher governments. The idea we were running a particularly large deficit is laughable.
Our deficit was not "maxed out". By historical comparisons, it was modest. By international comparisons, it was modest.
Not true. It was above 2% every year.
And if you look at this bar chart from 2010, you can see this was not remarkable when compared with the Major or Thatcher governments. The idea we were running a particularly large deficit is laughable.
Actually you can see it was remarkable. In the past there was an economic cycle whereby the deficit went up in downturns and down in boom times. Its basic Keynesian economics. At the end of 80s the deficit went down and was in a small surplus when the recession hit. It then continued to be reduced year on year during the 90s until it was a surplus.
Then for no good reason the surplus was transformed to a deficit comparable to a post-downturn deficit from 2002/03 onwards despite there having not been a downturn. That meant when the inevitable next stage of the econoic cycle hit the deficit was already significant rather than a surplus like the prior recession!
Comparing boomtime deficits to post-downturn deficits is madness.
The thing about Sanders is that he wears his ideology on his sleeve and therefore already half the electorate won't vote for him. Both Trump and Obama were harder to pin down idealogically and therefore voters could and do project their own hopes on to them.
The thing about Sanders is that he wears his ideology on his sleeve and therefore already half the electorate won't vote for him. Both Trump and Obama were harder to pin down idealogically and therefore voters could and do project their own hopes on to them.
Brown's government net borrowing plans in the immediate period before the 2008 crash were indeed reasonable, which is why Cameron and Osborne felt able to mirror them in opposition. So I assume that by "tanked the economy" you are referring to the coordinated worldwide emergency actions in the period 2008 to 2010 made in order to keep the banking system afloat. What would you have done differently?
They weren't reasonable because our deficit was maxed out before the recession.
I would have by 2008 been running a small budgetary surplus rather than a maxed out credit card deficit before the recession hit. Just like happened with the prior recession. Brown had a small budget surplus at the start of the century but in the years prior to the recession ran a hefty deficit every year on the misguided belief he'd "eliminated boom and bust". He hadn't and his hubris cost us dearly.
I'm not going to put aside the time to argue the toss with you on that, although I dispute that. My point was different, namely that your criticism of Brown would if valid be equally applicable to the Conservatives in opposition because they went along with those pre 2008 net borrowing plans, only disputing points within them rather than the overall net borrowing envelope. Osborne's main thrust in the Autumn of 2007 was that there should be inheritance tax cuts matched by slightly less overall spending, leaving borrowing levels unchanged. Osborne wasn't arguing then that the government should have been running a budgetary surplus.
Judge governments by what they do rather than what they say in opposition. In government Osborne reduced the deficit every year - I respect that.
I'll judge Osborne on both.
In opposition, September 2007: "A Conservative government would match Labour's projected public spending totals for the next three years, shadow chancellor George Osborne has said. He pledged two years of 2% increases. The final year total would be reviewed....... Mr Osborne said government spending under the Conservatives would rise from £615bn next year to £674bn in 2010/11. He said, like Labour, the final year total would be reviewed in 2009."
However, in government, what Osborne actually did was to deliver a lost decade of minimal growth in contrast to that achieved in economies outside of Europe which promoted growth by following more expansionary fiscal policies out of recession. And because Osborne's policy was so ineffective he was by the time he was sacked still planning to wear that hair shirt until 2020 rather than for the original 5 year period.
On the US elections - I think Pelosi tearing the speech up (I have no idea of the content) will play badly for the Dems in the general. I'm coming to the conclusion that Trump is the likely winner. To put him as a lock though is ridiculous.
Tearing up the speech was spiteful. She could have made a more powerful statement by remaining completely impassive throughout. But she didn't. She acted like a petulant teenager.
Trump was typically Trump by not shaking her hand. But she descended to his level by her actions.
You can't claim the moral high ground when you do things like that.
This. If you're resigned to voting for a party that behaves like a bunch of spoilt children, then you might as well vote for one that is at least halfway competent. The Dems' USP is being the adult in the room.
In the same vein, it's why attempts to point out racist behaviours in the Tory party ranks didn't land. Everyone already thinks they hate minorities, but for the Labour party to be seen as discriminatory is a total killer.
Brown's government net borrowing plans in the immediate period before the 2008 crash were indeed reasonable, which is why Cameron and Osborne felt able to mirror them in opposition. So I assume that by "tanked the economy" you are referring to the coordinated worldwide emergency actions in the period 2008 to 2010 made in order to keep the banking system afloat. What would you have done differently?
They weren't reasonable because our deficit was maxed out before the recession.
I would have by 2008 been running a small budgetary surplus rather than a maxed out credit card deficit before the recession hit. Just like happened with the prior recession. Brown had a small budget surplus at the start of the century but in the years prior to the recession ran a hefty deficit every year on the misguided belief he'd "eliminated boom and bust". He hadn't and his hubris cost us dearly.
I'm not going to put aside the time to argue the toss with you on that, although I dispute that. My point was different, namely that your criticism ld have been running a budgetary surplus.
Judge governments by what they do rather than what they say in opposition. In government Osborne reduced the deficit every year - I respect that.
I'll judge Osborne on both.
In opposition, September 2007: "A Conservative government would match Labour's projected public spending totals for the next three years, shadow chancellor George Osborne has said. He pledged two years of 2% increases. The final year total would be reviewed....... Mr Osborne said government spending under the Conservatives would rise from £615bn next year to £674bn in 2010/11. He said, like Labour, the final year total would be reviewed in 2009."
However, in government, what Osborne actually did was to deliver a lost decade of minimal growth in contrast to that achieved in economies outside of Europe which promoted growth by following more expansionary fiscal policies out of recession. And because Osborne's policy was so ineffective he was by the time he was sacked still planning to wear that hair shirt until 2020 rather than for the original 5 year period.
Had Remain won the referendum and Osborne stayed Chancellor he wanted to take spending as a percentage of GDP down to just 35%, which would have been the lowest level in the OECD alongside Australia, so maybe some logic in those anti austerity Leave voters who now have big spending Boris in charge rather than Dave and George
My original post was actually a ribbing joke. However, your tetchy and personal response to it irritated me and so I drew a broader observation about your posting style.
Anecdotes are always welcome, and of course it is the way you tell them: there is often a hidden brag in there, and I find it obvious. Self-awareness is a developing skill of yours - and this has happened before with posts about your family firm - so I thought it might be useful to point this out to you, so you could reflect. You do seem much more sensitive than these days than you were 3-4 years ago.
This has obviously upset you, so I will leave it there, but feel free to VM if you wish to discuss further.
While conflicts between no. 10 and 11 are the bread and butter of British politics, isn't this a rather swift one to develop? Note also the releases on HS2 last week.
Possible HS2 phase 3 incoming....
I suspect the bit into Euston to be kicked into the long, long grass.
Also I'm not sure how you build HS2 phase 2 and Northern PowerRail at the same time so it's possible the latter will be prioritised.
HS2 is going to have Euston as its terminus - already they are starting to demolish the current Euston station.
Only in UK could we terminate HS2 at the station that doesn't run HS1 to the Continent.
If only we'd done like France and put all the TGV lines into one Paris station......oh.....
The better comparison is Berlin Hauptbahnhof. Build a London Central Station and run tracks from all the major terminus stations. Although I think Berlin already had better through routes and after Unification there were plenty of bits of the city you could build on (I think Berlin Hbf is just in the old East).
Judge governments by what they do rather than what they say in opposition. In government Osborne reduced the deficit every year - I respect that. I'll judge Osborne on both.
In opposition, September 2007: "A Conservative government would match Labour's projected public spending totals for the next three years, shadow chancellor George Osborne has said. He pledged two years of 2% increases. The final year total would be reviewed....... Mr Osborne said government spending under the Conservatives would rise from £615bn next year to £674bn in 2010/11. He said, like Labour, the final year total would be reviewed in 2009."
However, in government, what Osborne actually did was to deliver a lost decade of minimal growth in contrast to that achieved in economies outside of Europe which promoted growth by following more expansionary fiscal policies out of recession. And because Osborne's policy was so ineffective he was by the time he was sacked still planning to wear that hair shirt until 2020 rather than for the original 5 year period.
REPLY
Wonderful how the left blame Osborne for Brown's failure. even Darling wouldn't do that, he'd put the blame where it really lies, on the shoulders of the idiotic Brown.
Osborne was right to oppose Mrs May who turned out to be a disastrous leader of the Tory Party, That's why he was sacked, not for his policies.
It can be easy to misread people over the internet. I remember a year or so ago thinking Mr. Eagles was taking the piss over a recommended book about Charles when it was genuine.
I see Japanese officials are now worrying about the Olympics in the summer after 20 passengers on a cruise ship have been diagnosed with Coronavirus.
It is starting to feel like the efforts to contain it will fail, which could have huge ramifications for global healthcare systems and the global economy.
Glad I’m heavily overweight on gold, and have next to nothing on Chinese stocks. Japanese exposure is not significant.
Sanders won the popular vote as most pollsters predicted, just Buttigieg won a few more delegates
Source? The pollsters got Biden totally wrong which must cast a big doubt over his national numbers and those in later states. Now the centrist vote in many state is ready for Pete to pluck
On the US elections - I think Pelosi tearing the speech up (I have no idea of the content) will play badly for the Dems in the general. I'm coming to the conclusion that Trump is the likely winner. To put him as a lock though is ridiculous.
He should probably be at 5/4, or something like that.
Why do some people just post Twitter links without adding personal commentary about why they think posting them is relevant? Do they believe that it’s some sort of public service?
Sanders won the popular vote as most pollsters predicted, just Buttigieg won a few more delegates
Source? The pollsters got Biden totally wrong which must cast a big doubt over his national numbers and those in later states. Now the centrist vote in many state is ready for Pete to pluck
Why do some people just post Twitter links without adding personal commentary about why they think posting them is relevant? Do they believe that it’s some sort of public service?
As they find them relevant and they speak for themselves without adding pointless commentary for the likes of you
It can be easy to misread people over the internet. I remember a year or so ago thinking Mr. Eagles was taking the piss over a recommended book about Charles when it was genuine.
Indeed, and it can bring out the worst in people - including myself.
I’ve met Charles, TSE, JohnO and Cyclefree all in real life on a 1:1 (and we’ve all got on very well - and I personally like them all) but that hasn’t stopped us having a good old barney on this forum at times.
I don’t take those too seriously but sometimes you can genuinely upset or offend someone because it strays into the personal (I can certainly overreact and lash out) and it’s good to recognise when that might have taken place, step back and apologise.
Wonderful how the left blame Osborne for Brown's failure. even Darling wouldn't do that, he'd put the blame where it really lies, on the shoulders of the idiotic Brown.
Osborne was right to oppose Mrs May who turned out to be a disastrous leader of the Tory Party, That's why he was sacked, not for his policies.
Austerity, pace Osborne, was misguided. Even if it might have worked in isolation, which is questionable, it faced Germany forcing the same mistakes onto the Eurozone, ruling out any hope of an export boom across the Channel. Austerity was wrong. Osborne was wrong. Ask Boris.
It can be easy to misread people over the internet. I remember a year or so ago thinking Mr. Eagles was taking the piss over a recommended book about Charles when it was genuine.
Indeed, and it can bring out the worst in people - including myself.
I’ve met Charles, TSE, JohnO and Cyclefree all in real life on a 1:1 (and we’ve all got on very well - and I personally like them all) but that hasn’t stopped us having a good old barney on this forum at times.
I don’t take those too seriously but sometimes you can genuinely upset or offend someone because it strays into the personal (I can certainly overreact and lash out) and it’s good to recognise when that might have taken place, step back and apologise.
Why do some people just post Twitter links without adding personal commentary about why they think posting them is relevant? Do they believe that it’s some sort of public service?
To be fair the Twitter posts or threads that are posted on here without comment are often quite interesting or relevant to the ongoing discussion.
Sanders won the popular vote as most pollsters predicted, just Buttigieg won a few more delegates
Source? The pollsters got Biden totally wrong which must cast a big doubt over his national numbers and those in later states. Now the centrist vote in many state is ready for Pete to pluck
looking at those numbers and adding in the 38% who have not been tabulated yet and it looks like turnout is down a bit from 2016 when 171,516 people termed up to coucuse,
Lots of caveats, Iowa is not necessarily typical, and things like the whether will have effected, and we don't know how many people termed up to the coucues sites not counted yet.
but still, I don't see a surge of enthusiasm on the democratic side.
It can be easy to misread people over the internet. I remember a year or so ago thinking Mr. Eagles was taking the piss over a recommended book about Charles when it was genuine.
Indeed, and it can bring out the worst in people - including myself.
I’ve met Charles, TSE, JohnO and Cyclefree all in real life on a 1:1 (and we’ve all got on very well - and I personally like them all) but that hasn’t stopped us having a good old barney on this forum at times.
I don’t take those too seriously but sometimes you can genuinely upset or offend someone because it strays into the personal (I can certainly overreact and lash out) and it’s good to recognise when that might have taken place, step back and apologise.
You've also met me at the Tory conference in 2009
Thanks Mike. That’s right. I enjoyed meeting you too!
Not quite - 50 is the key number (anything above is positive territory, anything below is negative) so you want the display to be centred around that point and, ideally, for the bars to indicate vertical distance away from neutrality.
Why do some people just post Twitter links without adding personal commentary about why they think posting them is relevant? Do they believe that it’s some sort of public service?
To be fair the Twitter posts or threads that are posted on here without comment are often quite interesting or relevant to the ongoing discussion.
See the post above yours. That small comment adds value and makes me thing (a) the poster has read it; and (b) thought about it. So encourages me to look at it. Not just scraped the internet like it’s a care in the community project.
The Buttigieg Sanders gap in the polling is unexplainable.
The lack of disclosure over the demographic numbers of these polls is frustrating.
How could they miss Buttigeig so badly?
I don't think it's surprising at all. Caucuses are known to be incredibly difficult to poll, and the history in Iowa is that they are usually far out. Getting a representative sample is well-nigh impossible; it's a feature, not a bug, of caucuses that people change their minds on the night, and in any case the polls showed that a large proportion of respondents hadn't made their minds up.
It would be a category error to assume from this that the polls for upcoming primaries will be far off the mark as well; they may be, but this particular set of polls isn't evidence for that.
The US polling industry is not even self-regulated. Any poll with a sample under 500 should be ignored IMO, especially those which create stories out of subsamples in double figures.
Why do some people just post Twitter links without adding personal commentary about why they think posting them is relevant? Do they believe that it’s some sort of public service?
To be fair the Twitter posts or threads that are posted on here without comment are often quite interesting or relevant to the ongoing discussion.
It would be nice if the Twitter links were not automatically expanded, especially more than once.
Wonderful how the left blame Osborne for Brown's failure. even Darling wouldn't do that, he'd put the blame where it really lies, on the shoulders of the idiotic Brown.
Osborne was right to oppose Mrs May who turned out to be a disastrous leader of the Tory Party, That's why he was sacked, not for his policies.
Austerity, pace Osborne, was misguided. Even if it might have worked in isolation, which is questionable, it faced Germany forcing the same mistakes onto the Eurozone, ruling out any hope of an export boom across the Channel. Austerity was wrong. Osborne was wrong. Ask Boris.
Ask Boris, you gotta be joking!!. WE need to run our economy the same way we SHOULD run our finances... I never run my finances in defecit*** (I was for a short while when my wife died.) If I have a problem, I cut back till its resolved, spending money like Brown and what Corbyn WANTED TO DO are never the answer..
Why do some people just post Twitter links without adding personal commentary about why they think posting them is relevant? Do they believe that it’s some sort of public service?
To be fair the Twitter posts or threads that are posted on here without comment are often quite interesting or relevant to the ongoing discussion.
See the post above yours. That small comment adds value and makes me thing (a) the poster has read it; and (b) thought about it. So encourages me to look at it. Not just scraped the internet like it’s a care in the community project.
Sometimes the ratio of tweets to conversation can go over the top, but generally the ones posted on here seem relevant to current affairs.
The Buttigieg Sanders gap in the polling is unexplainable.
The lack of disclosure over the demographic numbers of these polls is frustrating.
How could they miss Buttigeig so badly?
I don't think it's surprising at all. Caucuses are known to be incredibly difficult to poll, and the history in Iowa is that they are usually far out. Getting a representative sample is well-nigh impossible; it's a feature, not a bug, of caucuses that people change their minds on the night, and in any case the polls showed that a large proportion of respondents hadn't made their minds up.
It would be a category error to assume from this that the polls for upcoming primaries will be far off the mark as well; they may be, but this particular set of polls isn't evidence for that.
In addition, all New Hampshire (and other state) polling is now effectively irrelevant, since the electorate now has materially more information (from one angle, infinitely more!) on who the likely serious contenders are and who is as much of a wasted vote as Jeb Bush.
The Buttigieg Sanders gap in the polling is unexplainable.
The lack of disclosure over the demographic numbers of these polls is frustrating.
How could they miss Buttigeig so badly?
I don't think it's surprising at all. Caucuses are known to be incredibly difficult to poll, and the history in Iowa is that they are usually far out. Getting a representative sample is well-nigh impossible; it's a feature, not a bug, of caucuses that people change their minds on the night, and in any case the polls showed that a large proportion of respondents hadn't made their minds up.
It would be a category error to assume from this that the polls for upcoming primaries will be far off the mark as well; they may be, but this particular set of polls isn't evidence for that.
In addition, all New Hampshire (and other state) polling is now effectively irrelevant, since the electorate now has materially more information (from one angle, infinitely more!) on who the likely serious contenders are and who is as much of a wasted vote as Jeb Bush.
Comments
To put him as a lock though is ridiculous.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/04/opinion/iowa-buttigieg-sanders.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
Imagine Corbyn tearing up the Queen's Speech while she's talking. Its absurd.
But Pete is on his way.
There's a six minute walk between Euston and St Pancras. Many airports will have a more than six minute walk between terminals so its not exactly world's apart.
Brown's government net borrowing plans in the immediate period before the 2008 crash were indeed reasonable, which is why Cameron and Osborne felt able to mirror them in opposition. So I assume that by "tanked the economy" you are referring to the coordinated worldwide emergency actions in the period 2008 to 2010 made in order to keep the banking system afloat. What would you have done differently?
I would have by 2008 been running a small budgetary surplus rather than a maxed out credit card deficit before the recession hit. Just like happened with the prior recession. Brown had a small budget surplus at the start of the century but in the years prior to the recession ran a hefty deficit every year on the misguided belief he'd "eliminated boom and bust". He hadn't and his hubris cost us dearly.
Did he just say that? Or did I mishear?
Pretty sure I have just read that there have been no such projects for years.
Trump was typically Trump by not shaking her hand. But she descended to his level by her actions.
You can't claim the moral high ground when you do things like that.
For instance, there used to be about a 15 minute gap between East Coast Leeds-King's Cross trains arriving and St Pancras Javelins departing. The times I've attempted that, with family in tow to be fair, that has never proved quite makeable despite the walk between stations being 2 minutes and so our King's Cross arrival to St Pancras departure has ended up being 45 minutes.
Just because you aren't maxing out the credit card today doesn't mean you should, that's what Brown got wrong.
Oh the irony, as he tries to stop ministers speaking to the media and tries to stop some journalists from attending briefings.
ETA link added, which is the first that google threw up
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8636701.stm
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1225031094417883139?s=20
Then for no good reason the surplus was transformed to a deficit comparable to a post-downturn deficit from 2002/03 onwards despite there having not been a downturn. That meant when the inevitable next stage of the econoic cycle hit the deficit was already significant rather than a surplus like the prior recession!
Comparing boomtime deficits to post-downturn deficits is madness.
In opposition, September 2007: "A Conservative government would match Labour's projected public spending totals for the next three years, shadow chancellor George Osborne has said. He pledged two years of 2% increases. The final year total would be reviewed....... Mr Osborne said government spending under the Conservatives would rise from £615bn next year to £674bn in 2010/11. He said, like Labour, the final year total would be reviewed in 2009."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6975536.stm
Fair enough.
However, in government, what Osborne actually did was to deliver a lost decade of minimal growth in contrast to that achieved in economies outside of Europe which promoted growth by following more expansionary fiscal policies out of recession. And because Osborne's policy was so ineffective he was by the time he was sacked still planning to wear that hair shirt until 2020 rather than for the original 5 year period.
In the same vein, it's why attempts to point out racist behaviours in the Tory party ranks didn't land. Everyone already thinks they hate minorities, but for the Labour party to be seen as discriminatory is a total killer.
I’ve seen your comment from the previous thread.
My original post was actually a ribbing joke. However, your tetchy and personal response to it irritated me and so I drew a broader observation about your posting style.
Anecdotes are always welcome, and of course it is the way you tell them: there is often a hidden brag in there, and I find it obvious. Self-awareness is a developing skill of yours - and this has happened before with posts about your family firm - so I thought it might be useful to point this out to you, so you could reflect. You do seem much more sensitive than these days than you were 3-4 years ago.
This has obviously upset you, so I will leave it there, but feel free to VM if you wish to discuss further.
Judge governments by what they do rather than what they say in opposition. In government Osborne reduced the deficit every year - I respect that.
I'll judge Osborne on both.
In opposition, September 2007: "A Conservative government would match Labour's projected public spending totals for the next three years, shadow chancellor George Osborne has said. He pledged two years of 2% increases. The final year total would be reviewed....... Mr Osborne said government spending under the Conservatives would rise from £615bn next year to £674bn in 2010/11. He said, like Labour, the final year total would be reviewed in 2009."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6975536.stm
Fair enough.
However, in government, what Osborne actually did was to deliver a lost decade of minimal growth in contrast to that achieved in economies outside of Europe which promoted growth by following more expansionary fiscal policies out of recession. And because Osborne's policy was so ineffective he was by the time he was sacked still planning to wear that hair shirt until 2020 rather than for the original 5 year period.
REPLY
Wonderful how the left blame Osborne for Brown's failure. even Darling wouldn't do that, he'd put the blame where it really lies, on the shoulders of the idiotic Brown.
Osborne was right to oppose Mrs May who turned out to be a disastrous leader of the Tory Party, That's why he was sacked, not for his policies.
Sometimes it pays to be bearish.
I’m not attracted to bet on him at current odds.
I’ve met Charles, TSE, JohnO and Cyclefree all in real life on a 1:1 (and we’ve all got on very well - and I personally like them all) but that hasn’t stopped us having a good old barney on this forum at times.
I don’t take those too seriously but sometimes you can genuinely upset or offend someone because it strays into the personal (I can certainly overreact and lash out) and it’s good to recognise when that might have taken place, step back and apologise.
The polls in Iowa were crap
https://twitter.com/AnnaJerzewska/status/1225034885368336385
Lots of caveats, Iowa is not necessarily typical, and things like the whether will have effected, and we don't know how many people termed up to the coucues sites not counted yet.
but still, I don't see a surge of enthusiasm on the democratic side.
David Binder actually had Buttigieg ahead even on the popular vote
The lack of disclosure over the demographic numbers of these polls is frustrating.
How could they miss Buttigeig so badly?
It would be a category error to assume from this that the polls for upcoming primaries will be far off the mark as well; they may be, but this particular set of polls isn't evidence for that.